No Clear Path to Avoid Shutdown as House GOP Stands Firm

U.S. House Speaker John Boehner speaks to the press after a House Republican meeting on Capitol Hill on Thursday.
REUTERS

By

Janet Hook And

Kristina Peterson

Updated Sept. 26, 2013 7:36 p.m. ET

Congress's rocky path to avoiding a government shutdown became even rougher Thursday, as Speaker John Boehner said the House wouldn't accept the spending plan likely to emerge from the Senate.

The Ohio Republican's announcement foreshadows a set of last-minute legislative volleys between the House and Senate to fund federal agencies ahead of a deadline Monday, the final day of the fiscal year.

House Speaker John Boehner says the American people don't want Obamacare, and that the Senate needs to include Republican provisions in any bill that would keep the government from shutting down when the new fiscal year starts on Oct. 1 Photo: AP

Related

President Obama addressed the Republican critics of his health care plan on Thursday, calling their threat to shut down the government "irresponsible."

ENLARGE

A government shutdown is looking inevitable as House Majority Leader John Boehner says the House won't accept the spending plan likely to emerge from the Senate. (Photo: Getty Images)

The Senate is expected to pass a bill Friday that would fund the government for the first 1½ months of the new fiscal year. But Senate Democrats plan to restore money for the Affordable Care Act that House Republicans had stripped out, leaving the two chambers in conflict.

While the House and Senate struggled for agreement on a government-funding plan, Mr. Boehner was wrestling with the more daunting task of persuading members of his own party to support an increase in the federal debt ceiling.

Some of the most conservative House members were wary of the Republican leadership's plan to pass a one-year extension of government borrowing authority, even though it would be linked to a yearlong delay of the health law and other prized GOP policy goals. They expressed concern that the bill wouldn't cut spending enough and questioned the strategy of moving forward in the midst of a separate budget fight.

President Barack Obama repeated Thursday that he won't negotiate on the debt ceiling and won't sign any bill that defunds or delays the health-care law. He lashed out at Republicans for what he said were moves endangering the full faith and credit of the country. "You don't mess with that," he said in a speech in Largo, Md.

The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that if the debt ceiling isn't raised, the government will be unable to pay all its obligations sometime in late October.

Investors appear to be eyeing the possibility that the issue won't be resolved, judging by the sixfold increase in the past week—to its highest level since 2011—of the annual cost of derivatives some investors use to hedge against the risk the U.S. will default on its debt.

Rep. Tom Cole (R., Okla.), said House GOP leaders were still working to line up support for their debt-ceiling plan. "We've got an awful lot of support, but clearly at this point we don't have a final product that's attracting the number that we need," said Mr. Cole.

The fractiousness, jockeying and brinkmanship that spread across the Capitol rattled lawmakers and upended predictions about when and how the House and Senate would avoid two impending fiscal calamities.

Tensions were high on the Senate floor as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) exploded in anger when he was blocked from holding the vote Thursday by an objection from Sen. Mike Lee (R., Utah), a leading opponent of the health-care law.

The Republicans' delaying tactics were "as obvious to me as it is to a kindergarten student," Mr. Reid said.

"The reason that we're putting this off is because they would like for people around the country that they have notified to be able to watch,'' said Mr. Corker, in an unusually personal public squabble with a fellow Republican.

Mr. Lee said the debate was too important to cut short. "The American people are paying attention to this," he said.

House lawmakers are prepared to be in session this weekend to take up the bill once it returns from the Senate. Talk that they might accept the Senate bill, which is sure to include money for the health law, and send it to President Obama for his signature dissipated on Thursday when Mr. Boehner said flatly, "I do not see that happening."

Even so, Mr. Boehner said he didn't expect a government shutdown. Many GOP officials are anxious to avoid one, because they fear their party would bear the blame. Republicans were widely seen as responsible for the shutdowns in 1995-1996 that arose from budget fights between Congress and then-President Bill Clinton.

Rep. Mo Brooks (R., Ala.) accused Democrats of gunning for a shutdown for political gain. "They crave a government shutdown, because they believe it would give them a campaign advantage in 2014," he said.

House Republicans are considering a range of options for amending the Senate bill to make it more palatable to conservatives, which would force the Senate to consider the bill again before the Monday midnight deadline.

Adding a one-year delay in the health-care law's individual mandate is an option that House GOP lawmakers are considering, as is a repeal of the law's tax on medical devices, senior Republican aides said.

House Republican leaders have been telling conservatives that efforts to limit the reach of the health-care law would be a central element of the battle over raising the debt limit.

The draft debt-limit bill being circulated included a range of GOP policy proposals. In addition to delaying the health-care law, it included instructions for overhauling the tax code, blocking environmental regulations and clearing the way for building the Keystone XL pipeline.

National Republican Congressional Committee Chairman Greg Walden (R., Ore.) said the policies are intended to stimulate the economy, which in turn would reduce the deficit. He said they also were designed to broaden the GOP message beyond its traditional antispending, small-government focus.

"It's not just about cutting spending; it's not just about cutting government," he said. "We have to grow the economy. Our message hasn't resonated as positively as we would want."

Democrats derided the legislation as a political gesture. "The House is attaching the Republican Party platform to the debt ceiling," said Sen. Charles Schumer (D., N.Y.).

Even with its broad reach, the draft bill didn't include any major deficit-reduction initiatives, such as structural reforms to Medicare and Medicaid.

Conservative critics said it represented a retreat from Mr. Boehner's past promises to support increases in the debt limit only if they are matched by spending cuts of equal value, with the goal of balancing the budget in 10 years.

"I don't know if this gets us down that road," said Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R., S.C.). "Are we still dollar-for-dollar in terms of reduction of the deficit?"

Hi Bryan, as for your question, "who is stonewalling," that's a Washington thing; who do we blame.

Please note, I am not defending Obama or the Democrats. You are absolutely correct, in their current incarnation they have done nothing to balance the budget. But what is the Republican plan? The Democrats have never claimed to be the party of fiscal sanity. That's the Republican party's claim. So where's the beef?

As for your claim that the Republicans have sent a balanced budget to Congress, when? Are you talking about the 1950's Republican Congress? Or the Gingrich-Clinton years? Congress under John Boehner has never submitted a balanced budget to my knowledge. And please note, when I talk about balanced budget, I'm not talking about that wimpy "over the next 10 years" balanced budget. I'm talking about this year. If you have proof to the contrary, please, prove me wrong!

That said, if you Congress can't pass a budget where taxes equal spending, then the Treasury Department needs to borrow money to operate as required by Congress. And if Congress and the President require the country to borrow money, shouldn't we honor those debts?

Or does the Republican Congress' plan to balance the budget consists of an Argentina-style debt repudiation? That would work. It would constitute the largest "taking" of private property in history, but it would work. Is that the Republican plan?

I notice how the Republican wish list has expanded from de-funding ObamaCare to approving Keystone, and everything else. Is this the future of U.S. government? If any party controls either house of Congress or the presidency, it just threatens to blow out the country's financial brains if the other party doesn't do exactly what it says?

If the Republicans want a balanced budget, why don't they just pass one? De-funding ObamaCare and authorizing the Keystone pipeline will do nothing to accomplish that end. Come on, drop the political theater and show us a plan? But if you just want to blow your brains out, please go to the local gun store, buy a 12 gauge and some buckshot, place the gun in your mouth and pull. But please don't take us all down with you.

come Oct. 1st everything will be set into motion. I just don't like that they wait to tell us the true rates(other then whats been on the media)til it goes in effect.The proof is in the pudding so to speak and god help the Democrats if it turns to sour milk.

Could it be that Republicans are frantically trying to stop ObamaCare because they fear it will work? Seems to me that if ObamaCare was so terrible, they'd sit back and smile while it rolled out.... But I forgot: Republicans are the slaves of the Koch Brothers and the 1% - the group that will be negatively impacted financially by ObamaCare....

"President Barack Obama repeated Thursday that he won't negotiate on the debt ceiling and won't sign any bill that defunds or delays the health-care law. He lashed out at Republicans for what he said were moves endangering the full faith and credit of the country. "You don't mess with that," he said in a speech in Largo, Md."

It is the House that holds the purse strings and they are obligated to protect the fiscal health of the nation. America has never recovered financially since 9/11. Despite the money pumping, the living dead given mortgages,0.9% auto financing, etc. the economy has been in a downward spiral. We need to face the fact that the USA is broke.

When I no longer have money in my household checking account I stop spending. As a nation we can ill afford to do no less. I'd l-o-v-e to take a European vacation to see family but I've got more pressing and urgent financial obligations, thus no vacay for me.

We cannot afford any more wars. We cannot afford expansion of so-called social programs. And we certainly cannot afford Obamacare.

There are right wing lunatics at our door, and I say never negotiate with terrorists. We can only hope that this traiterous brand of Republicans Cruz on out of here before they bring down our government and everything our founding fathers fought for.

Since Obama delyaed the Business Requirement for a year, it only seems reasonable that they extend the individual mandate a year as well. Allowing the exchanges and other sections to stay as law. pre-existing conditions, 26 yo dependent coverage etc seems logical. Furthermore, they could also codify the employer mandate as well to avoid potential court challenges to Obama's executive order.

The year delay would allow for both parties to start to fix Obamacare to ensure it is affordable and NOT penalize ordinary Americans.

The cost of the subsidies, loss of the medical tax, etc. could be made up via cuts else where in the budget, including defense.

both parties have to get real on budget, debt, taxes and other entitlements.

The thing that strikes me about this whole debate is how badly the GOP hate this law even before we have an opportunity to see if any part of it works. It's as if to say, "We are more scared if it will work, than if it doesn't". They apparently have much to lose if it works, which is why it is easy to say that "The GOP hates the American poor and working classes of people". All the evidence to points to this conclusion.

The GOP has invested everything, I mean everything, in the premeise that "big government is bad". Full stop. No matter what, unflinchingly, unwaveringly, uncompromisingly, big government is bad. Therefore anything the fed does is bad. Protecting children with preexisting conditions = bad. Making sure everyone pays their medical insurance premiums so the cost to the country decreases = bad. Making sure that hospitals and doctors treat patients with 80% of their healthcare expenses = bad. It''s not only greedy, it's stupid; Caring for American individuals means caring for American society.

Does the federal government have a role to play in protecting citizens from the ravages of unregulated capitalism? Yes indeed, and it always has. If the financial sector wasn't so damned greedy, then we wouldn't need all of this regulation to curb their greed. When glass-steagal was rescinded, it was a very, very sad day for America.

If the foundation of American style capitalism is "Caveat emptor" (buyer beware), then who protects the consumer from greedy people who care nothing for others, and care only about their bottom lines, golden parachutes and multi-million dollar bonuses? If American style capitalism is going to make it's living on the backs of the poor and working classes, only the fed can set limits, and I believe that is, and should be, their continuing role.

And to all you profiteers who don't care about the health and welfare American citizens, I say you are unpatriotic, greedy charlatans. You may have a mind for figures, but your heart is hard like a stone, and I am glad I am not you. All this for a little bit of money? How terribly noble of you.

Maybe they should just stop and pass a budget, running the Government on a series of CRs is a dumb as a box of rocks. It would probably take them quite a bit of time to pass one but they would start to get a lot of outside pressure to get it done.

Time the House got tough...first ask his Goldman Sachs Highness Lew..to produce a prioritized list of outflows based on revenue inflows...what he is going to pay first, second and so on..publicize this..and the debate can start on where we draw the line to eliminate spending. Second..start proceedings to block the Federal Reserve from buying any more federal debt...if Obama refuses to negotiate..then give him his unlimited debt ceiling but only with no more Fed purchases of debt..

IDAHO EMBRACES HEALTH INSURANCE EXCHANGE — RELUCTANTLYSeptember 24, 2013 Businesses helped Gov. Butch Otter persuade legislative opponents of Obamacare to pass the exchange.---Republicans outnumber Democrats 4 to 1 in the Legislature, and only a third of Idahoans voted for Obama last fall — the third-lowest tally nationwide.---Nonetheless, employers and Otter, staunch opponents of the law, were able to convince tea party activists and other critics that having the state run the marketplace where individuals and small businesses shop for coverage could result in less expensive premiums — and keep control in Boise.---Alex LaBeau, president of the Idaho Association of Commerce and Industry, the state’s most influential business lobby, argued the state could better control costs, offer more choice and preserve the role of agents and brokers.

His group helped elect more than a dozen new “business-friendly” state legislators who supported a state-run marketplace, also called an exchange.

“The business community always prefers to work with state government, as our state agencies always pick up the phone when we call,” LaBeau says.

Would somebody please put ME out of MY misery and just SHUT DOWN the GOVERNMENT. On Tuesday, 01 OCT the sun WILL rise in the EAST, the winds WILL blow. the birds WILL chirp/sing and life will GO ON. All t;his talk of a 'shutdown' are a BUNCH of theatrics that WON'T even garner an Oscar NOMINATION ......

I love barry and Harry's idea of negotiating. Give me everything I want and I will not call you as many mean names. And Harry has the nerve to bring up kindergarten? The level of bs coming from those two requires more than hip waders....

One thing is for sure, one party has to control all of congress for the country to go forward. Being that the Democrats have attempted to negotiate with the Republicans. conceding several points to get a temporary spending bill passed and the Republicans have given nothing. We would be better off with a Democratic controlled congress.

***POLICIES ON MICHIGAN'S HEALTH EXCHANGE TO COST LESS THAN ELSEWHERE***Michiganders shopping for insurance on the Michigan Health Insurance Marketplace beginning next Tuesday will spend less than much of the country, a possible result of competition drawn to the state exchange.

In Michigan, the lowest prices for three categories of policies, called bronze, silver and gold, all came in lower than the national average, according to a federal analysis released today. For example, the lowest cost silver plan — a plan that will cover about 70% of medical costs — will cost an average of $271 a month, compared with the national average of $310.

What I find humorous, sad and reprehensible all at once is that His Petulant Arrogance Obama is willing to both shut down the government and risk a default on the US debt because he insists that his fatally flawed legacy (at least the parts he hasn't delayed or that have already been repealed) still be implemented, even as word spreads that the exchange for small businesses isn't ready and there are serious doubts about the individual exchanges ability to be functional in four days. Sheer madness.

Its the GOP's last desperate attempt by derail the Affordable Health Care act. Why does the GOP hate the people of America so much? They would rather see Americans suffer with no health care then to even try just a little to help the Americans that can not get insurance because of their circumstances. No plan to help just obstructionism.

It matters little if the republicans gain control of the senate unless they have 67 votes to override Obama's vetos. Now is the only opportunity to reduce spending and regulation until after the 2016 election. If republicans don't force the issue now, they never will.

Ms. Dowling, as usual, your rabid spew continues to poison the comments section. I suggest that those who you call terrorists are more concerned with the welfare of this country than you are. You are simply a traitor to what the founding fathers envisioned as the governing system of this country. Perhaps, you might wish to emigrate to someplace like Cuba. Their system would be more to your liking.

You display the attitude of your florid NPD idol. It has no place in either government or the interpersonal commerce of intellect. I have, however, seen this sort of stuff on the playgrounds during 3rd grade recess. You do your mother, who apparently was a good person, no credit.

85% of Americans had health care prior to this bill. To date an additional 1% are insured as a result of turning the entire system on it head. This has far less to do with an "anti big government mantra" than it has to do with the inability of government to ethically manage the funds they receive. SS is broke. Medicare is broke. Why? Because the funds collected are spent on everything except the programs and the Americans it was designed to help. This will be no different. We all know that.This is about the potential chaos in store for Americans once they realize what they are being ordered to do by government by virtue of them breathing air in the United States of America.Much good is going to come of this though. Businesses are going to delink themselves from providing health care and force Americans to shop the business. That's step one. And it's a huge step. The opportunity for doctors to go back to a system where they are paid by their patients is a great step forward, in terms of fixing a broken system.

All not bad ideas. However, if we really want to cut the deficit and the budget the cuts need to be in the drivers of those problems: DoD, Medicaid and Social Security. The ACA only marginally changes the cost of out total healthcare to GDP; some may say it actually decreases the percentage (no one knows). But the real drivers of our debt are DoD, Medicare and SS.

Derek, that kind of "you started it" reasoning is part of the GOP's problem. Sure, everyone has done some gerrymandering. But the fact remains that more Americans voted for Democratic House candidates than Republican, but gerrymandering gave the House to the GOP. The continuing lurch to the right will result in the end of the GOP (and not the beginning of an equally powerful Tea Party) which will in turn deliver elections to the Democrats for the next few cycles. You ignore this at your peril.

We voted for a Democratic House, but gerrymandering skewed the results, and the will of the people was overturned. What's odd is that the GOP learned nothing from this, and is racing full-bore toward obsolescence by catering to the loud, rabid few who otherwise would have lost.

Obamacare does absolutely nothing to provide health care for people. You are conflating health insurance with medically care. They only tangentially relate to each other. Sine the law is forcing hospitals and clinics to reduce staff, and is taxing medical device manufacturers into moving operations off shore or to dramatically reduce workers, and since it is forcing employers to reduce employee hours to less than 30 per week, the one could just as easily ask why do the Democrats hate the people of America so much?

How is wanting to slow the massive deficit spending that is eroding America hating the American people? Anyone who claims that the GOP has no plans is either willfully ignorant or blatantly lying. Perhaps none of this debt ceiling increase "showdown" would be needed if the Dems had done their job and produced an actual budget in the last several years instead of engaging in endless demagoguery, hysterical hyperbole and hypocrisy.

What even remotely credible basis do you have to ask, "Why does the GOP hate the people of America so much?" I'd really like to know because it's clear to me that a fully implemented "ObamanationCare" would be nothing more than an abomination, and who would what that?

Indeed, at this late date in concert with all "The Obamanation's" lies, well demonstrated incompetence and propensity to promise literally anything without regard for his capacity to deliver what he's promised, it's obvious to be that both patriotism and prudence would require that any American who cares about this country view anything that falls out of "The Obamanation's" mouth with great suspicion. After all, do you not remember "The Obamanation" apocryphally promising that, by the end of his first term in office, he would cut the deficit in half? If you have forgotten the foregoing, the below video will help you remember:

"..we intend to cut the deficit we inherited by half by the end of my first term in office." - Barack Hussein Obama

GW had nothing to do with it, as far as I know, which is probably why the GOP kept him away from the convention last year. I will say, given today's Republicans, GWB is looking better every day. Now Cheney--he's another matter, and history will never treat him kindly.

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. Distribution and use of this material are governed by our Subscriber Agreement and by copyright law. For non-personal use or to order multiple copies, please contact Dow Jones Reprints at 1-800-843-0008 or visit www.djreprints.com.